Comments on: Say ‘no’ to insect killing

By: Dustie Meads of Critterclipart.com

Dustie Meads of Critterclipart.com — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 06:54:54 +0000

When I think bugs should be killed:

When they are threatening the food we eat
When they are threatening us with possible illness and/or death
When they are threatening our children with bites and/or stings
When they are threatening our homes (includes landscaping)
When the bug needs identifying for scientific purposes and it simply can not be identified by good photos or site, which is rarely the case today with the internet. Just check out whatsthatbug.com. They gotten some really strange bug photos and have been able to identify most all of them.

I don’t think they need to be killed for bug collecting purposes. Having a collection of camera caught bugs would be much more satisfying. I own the domain name, Collectbugs.com and someday hope to make a site out of it where kids and adults interested in collecting bugs can open a free bug gallery and upload their own bug photos with commentary.

By: kd spectre

kd spectre — Sat, 29 Sep 2007 19:39:32 +0000

HELLO….McFly….anybody in there? GET REAL.
Although I’d never kill a dragonfly, honey bee, ladybug or Phidippus audax, excuse me, they’re BUGS! (OOOPS, Almost forgot butterflys and Praying Manti) Am totally amazed that the “have no life”, “bleeding heart”, liberal weenies have now taken on a new cause. Will we be picketing our local exterminator soon? “termites have rights too!” or mayhaps the ever popular, ” I bleed 4 mosquitos!” or maybe “Feed a roach, starve a fever.” While we’re at it, we could could start a new union for carpenter ants! Would it be OK to “Save a cricket….Kill a Mantis!” What about “Eat wood… 100 billion termites can’t be wrong!”
With all this hand-holdin’, sittin’ around the campfire singing kumbayah, and exchanging flowers,when is there time for photography?
BTW….Most of the large home buider stores stores have some nice fiberglass shower stalls that
can easily be converted into a quite serviceable makeshift “jar”.

By: Susheel

Susheel — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 10:16:38 +0000

ah! the alternative… thanks for this post too…

By: Juha Tyllinen

Juha Tyllinen — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 07:28:10 +0000

I’m against using dead specimen for nature photography. That feels simply fake if the picture tries to portray them as alive. On the other hand, set specimen are still the best for identification purposes and those can’t be alive. That is more like product photography, though.

By: Nimrod

Nimrod — Sun, 24 Jun 2007 13:13:08 +0000

I think P&S owners have an advantage here.
For the dragonfly he used f/2.8 and still depth of field is great and he could use a very fast shutter speed (1/500).

Using a DSLR one would have to use smaller aperture and therefore shutter speed must be reduced.

By: Squidder

Squidder — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 18:11:10 +0000

Me, personally - I’m in favor of not having to kill something, even if it is an insect, to take a picture of it, unless you’re trying to make a statement with a picture of a dead insect, or something…besides, small as they are, there are a lot of them and they play a role in the ecosystem, too. Stunning photo examples, by the way!

By: Mie

Mie — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 06:34:34 +0000

“if he can take photographs like this with simple equipment without killing anything, then why should you have to? The man’s got a point…”

I think he misses the point completely. You van take photograph like that without killing anything BUT you can’t take any kind of insect photos without stunning or killing.

Of Course it is better not kill, the questien is what to do when you have to hurt insect some way to get photo you like. Others stunn or kill insects for that and others choose not to.

By: Allen

Allen — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 20:44:52 +0000

Although I agree that you should not kill any living thing whenever possible, I will say that equating an insect’s life to that of a human’s is really really stretching and leaves your argument with little credibility. If you are going to make arguments like that then where do you draw the line of what is sensible?

By: Swarovski chick

Swarovski chick — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 09:11:11 +0000

Great follow up to the last article on the killing jar a terrible idea. I’m not sure about the stun for a limited time though. Next time Im at the beach and see a hot body, think Ill throw a brick at them to stun them just long enough to keep them still to get my photo. maybe not.

By: Lari Kemilainen

Lari Kemilainen — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 05:31:05 +0000

Actually it had never even occurred to me that it would be easier to shoot insects if they were dead. I use a manual focus telephoto lens and have many times thought of resorting to shooting stuffed birds instead of living, though.

The downside of shooting dead insects is that they are very difficult to arrange into a natural pose where they look like they’re doing something. Those little legs snap a little too easily, not to talk about trying to make a dead butterfly drink from a flower…

By: Brian Larter

Brian Larter — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 20:04:28 +0000

Don’t forget that already dead insects are fine as well. Not as much of a challenge as live ones but you can get some interesting results.

By: Paulo Rodrigues

Paulo Rodrigues — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 19:51:00 +0000

I have to say that I often find that children won’t stay still long enough to get a good photo, but your article has given me some food for thought.

By: Andrew Ferguson

Andrew Ferguson — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 19:20:36 +0000

I’m not surprised to find out that most people are against the killing of insects for photos. Personally I said ‘only if absolutely necessary’, but that’s just because I’m a brutal murderer.

I can’t think of many situations where it would be necessary to actually kill the insect to get the shot though, so as faras I saw this was a non-issue until I saw your post.